03 October 2012, 11:37

Hi

I've had a request for a blind student to be able to disable the HTML editor.

I've gone to the SIte Settings and noticed that 'user-defined' is an option. Great, I thought!!

I turned it on, then checked my own settings. I noticed that HTML editor was now unticked.

I am concerned that, if I do this for 1 person, it is going to affect 100s of others who will no longer see HTML editing without the need to go and update their settings.

Wouldn't it make more sense if, when changing the setting to 'user-defined', HTML editor is kept ON, as this is the more common option?

Or am I getting it all wrong.

Dan

Edit - if there is an option in any of the core files to make this happen, please let me know! :)

07 October 2012, 7:48

Anyone?

07 October 2012, 16:46

Hi Dan,

I don't know if there is a reason for it behaving like this, Kristina might know.

However, I would have expected it to keep the settings the users had already. Unless as part of the experimenting you disabled it for everyone first; that may have wiped out the current settings so that the system didn't disobey the administrator's decision. Even if this is the case, There might be a better way to deal with it for future versions.

I haven't time to check the code now, but perhaps raise it on the bugtracker.

Thanks,
Melissa.

07 October 2012, 18:02

Hi Dan,

I am on a 1.5.0 and I have 'HTML editor-->user defined'. When I go in as one user and disable the HTML editor for that users the WYSIWYG does not show. When I go in as another user, the HTML editor opens as expected for that user. So it looks like it works the way it should?

Have you tried changing the setting just for that user while leaving the site wide setting at 'HTML editor-->user defined'?

08 October 2012, 3:23

Hi Dirk

Thanks for the comments - I'll give it another go.

When I tested it, I chose User Defined then went to look at a text box and the HTML editor hadgone. I'll test it out with someone else.

It just felt like setting it as User Defined switched it off for everyone, leaving them to 'define' that they in fact wanted it on!

I hope i"m wrong.

Thanks again. 

dan

22 October 2012, 3:07

Hi Dan,

I tested it and it is as you say: When you switch the HTML editor from "Enable" to "User-defined", all users lose the HTML editor. I filed a bug at https://bugs.launchpad.net/mahara/+bug/1069656 because think the HTML editor should be kept.

As for your scenario right now. You can either go into the database on the backend directly and change the value in the table for the HTML editor setting manually or you can do it from the front end. Depending on how many users you have that might be a few CSV files as we don't recommend to change more than 100 users at once.

Once you flipped the setting to "User-defined" and your users don't have the HTML editor anymore, you can change that setting in bulk on the "Add users by CSV" screen by updating your users' setting in bulk (no need to change the password or send them an email, just the update). This is possible with Mahara 1.5+. Sorry, but I don't remember whether you are on that version or not.

So: You can export a CSV file with your users from "User search" -> select the users you wish to update -> "Get reports" -> "Download CSV file" and then use that on "Add users by CSV" http://manual.mahara.org/en/1.5/site_admin/users.html#add-and-new15-update-users-by-csv

Make sure you choose the correct institution and authentication method. A password change is not necessary. Tick the "Update users" box and then don't forget to place a check mark into the check box next to "HTML editor" and you are good to go.

Hope that helps.

Cheers

Kristina

22 October 2012, 5:32

HI Kristina

Thanks for the reply. It would probably be easier to change the database rather than deal with CSV. We have about 1500 students.

What I've done in the interim is put a big announcement on the front page of Mahara advising people to update their settings. Of course, not everyone will do this. How do I change the backend to force the HTML editor to be on?

Thanks :)

dan

22 October 2012, 13:58

Hello Dan,

Sorry, a dev would need to tell you where in the database the value is stored.

Cheers

Kristina